What does the law say about CEC’s removal?

Polity & Governance · 27 September 2026 · Based on The Hindu (original report)

2-minute summary

The appointment and removal processes of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) and Election Commissioners (ECs) in India have been subjects of intense legal and political debate. Under Article 324(2), ECI appointments were historically made by the executive due to a lack of specific parliamentary legislation. In March 2023, the Supreme Court's landmark *Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India* judgment established an interim selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, Leader of the Opposition (LoP), and the Chief Justice of India (CJI). In response, Parliament enacted the CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023, replacing the CJI with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM. This legislative shift has been challenged in court for giving the executive a 2:1 majority, leading to a recent split verdict in the Supreme Court on whether to refer the matter to a larger Constitution Bench. Structurally, while the CEC enjoys stringent constitutional protection against removal (similar to a Supreme Court judge), other ECs can be removed simply on the recommendation of the CEC.

Why it's in the news

Opposition parties have demanded the removal of CEC Gyanesh Kumar following reports that ECs Sukhbir Singh Sandhu and Vivek Joshi formally recorded objections 14 times over 10 months. Concurrently, the Supreme Court delivered a split verdict on referring the constitutional challenges against the CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023, to a larger bench.

Facts to remember

Under Article 324(5) of the Constitution, the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) can only be removed in a like manner and on like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court.
Under Article 324(5), Election Commissioners other than the CEC can be removed from office on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner.
The CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023 established a selection committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the PM.
The Dinesh Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms recommended that the CEC's appointment be done in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition.
The 244th Report of the Law Commission of India recommended a three-member collegium of the PM, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the CJI for ECI appointments.

Background and context

For over seven decades, the appointment of the CEC and ECs was executed solely by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister and Council of Ministers, as Parliament had not enacted a specific law under Article 324(2). This executive-dominated process was challenged in *Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India* (2023) on grounds of compromising the ECI's independence. The Supreme Court ruled that a neutral collegium (PM, LoP, and CJI) must make recommendations until Parliament enacts a law. Parliament subsequently passed the CEC and Other ECs (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, which excluded the CJI, drawing fresh constitutional challenges regarding executive overreach and institutional autonomy.

Constitutional provisions

Article 324(2) — Provides that the appointment of the CEC and other ECs shall be made by the President, subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament.
Article 324(5) — Safeguards the tenure of the CEC, stating they can only be removed in a like manner and on like grounds as a Judge of the Supreme Court. However, other ECs can be removed on the recommendation of the CEC.

Committees and reports

Dinesh Goswami Committee on Electoral Reforms — Recommended that the appointment of the CEC should be done in consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition.
Law Commission of India (244th Report) — Recommended a three-member collegium consisting of the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the Chief Justice of India for ECI appointments.

Previous UPSC questions on this theme

Mains GS-2 2018 — In the light of recent controversy regarding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVM), what are the challenges before the Election Commission of India to ensure the trustworthiness of elections in India?

Mains practice: Critically analyze how the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, balances executive prerogative with the institutional independence of the Election Commission of India.

The Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners (Appointment, Conditions of Service and Term of Office) Act, 2023, was enacted to fill the legislative vacuum under Article 324(2). However, its provisions have sparked a debate on institutional independence versus executive control.

• **Executive Dominance in Selection**: By replacing the Chief Justice of India (as prescribed in the *Anoop Baranwal* case) with a Union Cabinet Minister, the Selection Committee now consists of the PM, a Cabinet Minister, and the Leader of Opposition. This gives the ruling executive a decisive 2:1 majority, potentially compromising the perceived neutrality of the appointments.

• **Search Committee Limitations**: The Search Committee, headed by the Union Law Minister, shortlists five candidates. Since the screening process is entirely within executive control, it limits the scope of independent, non-bureaucratic talent entering the commission.

• **Differential Removal Safeguards**: While the Act provides statutory clarity, it does not address the constitutional disparity under Article 324(5). The CEC can only be removed like an SC Judge (requiring a special majority in Parliament), whereas ECs can be removed simply on the CEC's recommendation. This undermines the collegial equality of the three-member commission.

• **Positive Aspects**: The Act codifies qualifications (Secretary-level experience), provides a structured selection framework, and protects commissioners from civil/criminal proceedings for actions taken in good faith during official duties.

To ensure absolute public trust, the selection panel should be broad-based, possibly requiring a consensus or a judicial presence, thereby upholding the basic structure of free and fair elections.

Prelims practice questions

Q1. With reference to the Chief Election Commissioner and Other Election Commissioners Act, 2023, consider the following statements: 1. The Search Committee for shortlisting candidates is headed by the Cabinet Secretary. 2. The Selection Committee includes the Chief Justice of India as a member. 3. The President appoints the CEC and ECs based on the recommendations of the Selection Committee. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

1 and 2 only
3 only
2 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3

Answer: B. Statement 1 is incorrect because the Search Committee is headed by the Union Minister of Law and Justice. Statement 2 is incorrect because the Act replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister. Statement 3 is correct.

Q2. Consider the following statements regarding the removal of members of the Election Commission of India: 1. The Chief Election Commissioner can be removed from office only in a manner similar to a Judge of the Supreme Court. 2. Other Election Commissioners cannot be removed from office except on the recommendation of the Chief Election Commissioner. 3. The procedure for the removal of the CEC is detailed under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Which of the statements given above are correct?

1 and 2 only
2 and 3 only
1 and 3 only
1, 2 and 3

Answer: D. All three statements are correct. Under Article 324(5), the CEC has identical removal protections to an SC Judge, which invokes the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968. Other ECs can be removed by the President on the recommendation of the CEC.

Q3. The landmark 'Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India' (2023) judgment of the Supreme Court is primarily associated with which of the following?

The disqualification of legislators under the Tenth Schedule
The introduction of Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT)
The appointment process of the Election Commission of India
The constitutional validity of Electoral Bonds

Answer: C. The Anoop Baranwal case challenged the constitutional validity of the executive-led appointment process of the ECI, leading to the Supreme Court prescribing a three-member independent selection committee.

Revision flashcards

Which Article of the Constitution governs the superintendence, direction, and control of elections in India? Article 324.
Who are the members of the Selection Committee under the CEC and Other ECs Act, 2023? The Prime Minister (Chairperson), the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and a Union Cabinet Minister nominated by the Prime Minister.
What was the interim appointment mechanism prescribed by the Supreme Court in the Anoop Baranwal (2023) case? A committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, and the Chief Justice of India.
How does the removal process of an Election Commissioner (EC) differ from that of the Chief Election Commissioner (CEC)? The CEC can only be removed like a Supreme Court Judge (Article 324(5)), whereas other ECs can be removed by the President upon the recommendation of the CEC.
Which Act details the parliamentary procedure required to remove a Supreme Court Judge or the CEC? The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.